현대 심리신문기법이 허위자백을 유발시킨다는 견해들의 논증구조의 분석과 타당성 평가

The confession of a suspect or a defendant in a criminal proceeding improves the proceeding economics by decreasing unnecessary investigation and criminal proceeding and protects the human right of a suspect or a defendant. Of course, it is a valid statement only when the confession meets the requirement of voluntariness and credibility. Therefore, the modern interrogation technique of a investigation agency to get a legitimate confession from a suspect should be evaluated as a very legitimate and valid investigation activity of the investigation agency. Meanwhile, multiple research studies are appearing recently, which state that the modern interrogation technique used by investigation agencies is causing a false confession from a suspect. These studies argue that the investigation agencies developed exquisite interrogation technique and are using it to get false confession from a suspect and the studies attempt a demonstration based on the research studies and cases from United States. However, these opinions are committing errors in attempting demonstration by introducing the research studies in United States to Korean situation as they are without proper analysis and evaluation on the issue area of the modern interrogation technique that the technique causes false confession, the causes of false confession and the types of false confession. In addition, the studies are committing errors in ignoring the difference between the United States criminal justice system and the Korean criminal proceeding, in overlooking the difference among persuasion, coercion and deception, and passing over the function of modern interrogation technique in inducing a confession. Further, they are wrong in the hasty generalization of the prejudgment effect on a false confession. The ways to restrict a false confession and improve the voluntariness and credibility of a confession would be; the development of interrogation technique preventing false confession based on human right focused interrogation technique, reinforcement of defense attorney participation right during interrogation, practical guarantee of the statement right of a suspect regardomg the fact of its interest and further activation of video-recorded investigation. The attitude, which excludes the evidence admissibility of a pure confession by a suspect while considering the modern interrogation technique of drawing the logic contradiction in the confession from a defendant as a trap, is not desirable.